15 reasons Burton's Batman was better than Nolan's.

Also, found this gem on YouTube:

You know Robin was going to be Marlon Wayans right?

Shorty from Scary Movie

But the story to me was always better in Nolan's. Nolan's movies felt relevant and like they had meaning, and themes

I love them both, Nolan's Batman and Burton's. I love the fact that they're different, and I enjoy comparing them. I am really glad there is both. If you have a favourite, good for you.

I guess it's the same reason why there is "top 10" lists and "best of", which I enjoy, but the "which is better" discussion on these two franchises is played out.

If I say Nolan's is better, that dismisses everything that is great about Burton's, and vice versa. You should see both these films. Both are great!

I'm not picking a favourite! You can't make me!

TDKR was seriously one of the worst movies I have ever seen.

For me, the Nolan trilogy is far superior. I enjoy Burton's movies, though. I love Batman; it's an undeniable classic. When I first saw it, I was surprised to find out Tim Burton directed it. The only aspect of the movie that felt like Tim Burton was the Joker's plan. As for Batman Returns, I enjoy it. It's more of a Tim Burton movie than it is a Batman movie, though. And I usually don't like Tim Burton movies, but I still really enjoy Batman Returns. I actually like it more than Batman. I know, how dare I?

As for the Nolan trilogy, I just like it so much more. Batman Begins has an amazing storyline, villain, and so on. The same goes for the superior Dark Knight, which succeeds as a crime-drama as much as it does a comic book movie. The Dark Knight Rises may have a lot of gaping plot holes as well pacing issues, but it's still a fun ride. Also, with the Nolan trilogy, I like the casting choices much more.

You really need to see more movies and see a bigger world, there is a world of bad movies out there.

Uhm, that sound better in my head.

@deathpoolthet1000: Yeah, I've seen some pretty bad movies, but after factoring budget and actor talent, TDKR moves to the top.

@jloneblackheart: You make it sound like if it was Indiana Jones 4.

@deathpoolthet1000: There might be worse, but I typically avoid movies I KNOW will be really bad (ex. Indiana Jones 4).

@jloneblackheart: Wait worst that Shiah LaJerk CGI looking monkeys?

@deathpoolthet1000: What I was trying to say is, you could be correct, but I won't watch IJ4 to find out. I already know it's bad.

Now I prefer Nolan over Burton, but Nolan defiantly had his problems.

15)The Suit: Now I think the Begins suit is the best, I like the DK/DKR suit, except for the torso. The chest makes it look awkward. Burton's suit, was cool. I like it, but there is something about the Begins one that I love.

14)The Action: When you say that there was minimal action in the Nolan movies you're wrong no matter what. While hand to hand combat isn't Nolan's strong suit, chases are. The SWAT battle was awesome, and it showed what Batman can do.

13)Cast: Burton's cast is great but Nolan's cast better.

12)The Batcave:Yes Burton's used Batcave better. I did like that everything sunk into the ground. Favorite part of DKR is when he walks in front of the suit as it rises from the ground.

11)Introducing Batman: Both are fine.

10)Boring Bruce Wayne Scenes: All I can say to that is.... Fanboy

9)Theme Tune: Not going to compare because they are both very different and go with different tones, and styles.

8)A More Fun Joker: Heath was a lot better. No one could do a better job.

7)Batmobile: All comes down to preference

6)The Batwing: Same as above

5)Bale vs Keaton: I like Bale better, but Keaton was good. Bale looks like what I picture Bruce Wayne/Batman to look like.

4)Final Fights: No comment, this was a stupid point. Plus they called Ras a dull character.

3)Gotham City: To be fair Burton's version has really good gothic atmosphere but it looks not a real city , I like Nolan's version. N

2)Why So Serious?: I don't think it is a comperable reason . Two versions have different tones.

1)Escapism: Does it really matter?

Both versions of Batman get the character, at least the modern take, completely wrong.

Burton seems to care less in having the Joker as the person who killed Bruce's parents, and having Batman kill people without remorse.

Burton also had Bruce sleep upside down like a Bat. Why, I do not know.

Well my favourite Batman movie is still the 1989 Tim Burton one, so I agree with some of the article, but Christian Bale was a great Batman. The Nolan films, for me, just became a bit too serious and violent. Sinister violence, not comic book violence, such as the bit when the Joker stabbed a henchman in the eye...that sort of stuff is best reserved for Gangster movies. I thought that by making Dark Knight and Dark Knight rises so violent and brooding, it denied a lot of younger viewers from watching the films. I.e. I don't mind my 8 year old watching Batman (1989), she loves it...but no way she is watching any of the Nolan films. Frankly, if they had been released in the 70s, they would have all been an 18 classification. I mean Enter the Dragon is an 18, but is less brutal than Dark Knight.!

Batman, BAT-man, BAT.

I literally disagree with everything in the article. Some of his reasons are just plain silly. Like number 10, boring Bruce Wayne sceens? Really? So character development should just be cut down to nothing simply so we could have more fights. or number 7, "I don't like the Tumbler because it isn't nice to look at?" who gives a sh*t? It functions a lot better than the Burton's Batmobile.

The only thing I agree with here is when he said "Keaton played Bruce Wayne as an oddball, almost autistic" only where he says this adds charisma to the character, I say it makes him just ridiculous to watch, Bale may not have been the same level of intellect that we see in the comic, but Keaton was just painfully incompetent.

Disagree with just about everything... but then again I dont think the camp-era is something that should be praised.

@rulerofthisuniverse: "CHARACTER DEVELOPEMENTZ AND SYMBOLIZM IZ BAURING, ME WANT MAUR EXPOLZIONZ AND SCHUMACHER BAT-NIPPLEZ"!!!!

What's wrong with bat-nipplez? :p

P.S. I like Nolan's Batman (apart from the TDKR), but Burton's Batman will always be kind of unique in my heart.

@phaedrusgr: EVERYTHING.

The person who created the list sounds biased but setting that aside I just dont like Tim Burtons movies or any of his work

The points made in this article are godawful, flawed and biased. Both films are fantastic and both films have valid interpretations of the characters. They each have strengths and weaknesses and, because both films attempt different aims hat deviate from one another, shouldn't really be compared. Just accept both films as is.

Nicholsons joker had the psychopathic humor about himself; kind of a nutbar. He was the joker for non-comic loyalists. For films sake, he had an A to B to C development necessary for storytelling in a movie. Ledgers joker was really a psychopath. He was clearly mentally unstable and an anarchist. He also didnt have an origin, tapping into the comic character. Ledgers joker didn't need any further psychological development because his insanity meter was "maxed" out, if you will. In fact, it was the viewer who developed, as we tried to grasp what would bring a person to this. Classic film storytelling element; by not showing us the ghost, or in this case the origin, we're allowed to imagine.

Two quality Jokers, but everyone can explain Nicholsons, which makes Ledgers all the more frightening.

i never paid any attention to any batman movies.

I've been saying Nolan's Batman sucks, for years. He totally missed the character.

I had a few issues with the article.

• I disagree about the introduction. Batman upside down "here" was much more exciting to me.
• While Ledger's Joker was fun to watch, all this crap about him being the more unpredictable and dangerous is just BS. Pure biased BS. Ledger's J was methodical and extremely predictable. Nicholson's Joker shot and killed his right hand man on a whim. Because his balloons were stolen lol. Tried to melt Vale's face with acid for no real reason. And dangerous!? Burton's Joker kills dozens, maybe even a hundred people......FOR LAUGHS!!!!
• Lastly I'm really disappointed the article makes NO mention of Bruce's extreme lack of intelligence. Without Lucius he'd have been dead by the end of the first movie. It was pathetic. Even frickin Val Kilmer solved a bunch of riddles and you believed he was a smarty pants. Dick goddamn Grayson had the foresight to wear wax lips in defense of Ivy. Yeah. The characters in Batman and Robin were smarter than Nolan's Bruce Wayne. Chew on that.

When the next Batman movie comes out and they fix all of this (hopefully) maybe people will finally see.